Skepticism

EVENTS

Bringing back bad memories

Thunderf00t has come out with some execrable video in which he makes a number of horrible, awful, stupid claims: that there is a gray line between rape and bad sex, that it’s pointless to tell men not to rape, that telling women that it’s not their fault that they were raped is depriving them of agency — yeah, it’s one long parade of victim blaming non sequiturs (in which he repeatedly says he’s not victim blaming, while saying women often have the body language of victims). It’s horrifyingly ignorant, condescending, and oblivious to his own arrogant attitude.

Typical blunderthud, then. So don’t watch it.

Instead, read SomeGreyBloke, who has thoroughly deconstructed the video at length, in a 7 part series: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7. It’s good. It reveals Thunderf00t, and all the other clueless men (Joe Rogan, I’m looking at you) who think that they should not be held accountable if they have sex with someone whose ability to consent has been compromised, as total moral idiots.

One killer insight is that Thudordud simultaneously tries to claim that there is a gray line between bad sex and rape, while arguing that educating rapists won’t work because they’re like Ted Bundy. I don’t think Fubberf00t is anything like Bundy, nor are most rapists, but they do have one trait in common: an inability to use a mirror.

When people like Zerlina Maxwell advocate teaching kids not to rape, they’re not talking about trying to get through to serial killers like Ted Bundy. Of course it’s "bloody obvious" that sociopaths are not about to listen.

But most rapes aren’t committed by sociopaths. Most rapes are committed by men who are simply too selfish to think beyond their immediate gratification.

It is interesting that this subject bothers Thunderf00t so very very much.

Jebus. To think that we briefly had Dundert00t on this network at all…it’s embarrassing how bad he is.

Comments

It’s astounding that he was able to appear as reasonable as he seemed for so long. Once the veneer cracked, he just went full-bore jackass. I guess he still serves some purpose, as a cautionary tale: “Don’t be that guy.”

The other day on Twitter, defending this video, ThunderingFool made the argument that “No Means Yes”. In order to back this up, he brought up BDMS. Yes, he made this claim despite the fact that when properly done, the dominant respects the limits of the submissive.

And the ThunderingFool keeps whining that feminists are too stupid to understand what he has worked so hard to make perfectly clear.

If “telling women that it’s not their fault that they were raped is depriving them of agency,” doesn’t that imply Thunderf00t’s fanboy brigade is depriving Tf00t of agency by claiming he was only kicked from FTB because of those mean ol’ #FreeThoughtBullies?

The problem with Thunderfoot’s lock analogy is that locks make it harder for burglars to enter your house, but dressing modestly doesn’t make it harder for rapists to rape you. A more accurate analogy would be advising homeowners to not make their house look too fancy in order to avoid being robbed.

Teaching men not to rape is about situations like the one I found myself in with my wife before we were married. I don’t share this looking for a cookie, I hope it’s fairly typical, and wish it were more so. I want my sons and every man in the world to act this way, and expect them to, but many obviously don’t. When I was just beginning to date her, my now wife and I were at a party. She was very flirtatious when drunk and she got very drunk. She was hanging all over me most of the night. I was not drinking at the time and when the party ended I took her back to her apartment and got her to bed. She insisted I stay, so I did and went to sleep. There are too many instances where this story would have ended differently, where, in spite of our blossoming relationship, her invitation into the apartment, her flirtation, and her insistence that I stay, it would have been rape. How to behave in scenarios like this is what men need to be taught. That when a woman is blitzed, she can’t consent. And of course a whole lot more scenarios.

About a month ago, I was getting amorous with my girlfriend and we kind of brought things to the bedroom, but she looked a little unsure and uncomfortable, so I stopped. We talked, I found out the issue was the timing of our amorousness was bad for her.

I’m starting to get really paranoid about analogies. Unless someone is careful to demonstrate how their analogy is logically equivalent to the original point they are trying to make, it’s best not to bother with them. Analogies are often a means to sneak in new unspoken premises in order to commit logical fallacies.

@Kevin – It seems like it ought to be so easy and uncontroversial, doesn’t it? Ask permission from a consenting adult and accept “no” for an answer without reprisals. Why some people can’t get this, and don’t think we ought to teach it, is beyond me.

@Cenk
There’s no faster way to a ban than a than the patronizing belief that you will be banned because Pharyngula is supposedly a “Hive Mind”, espescially if you make multiple comments about it without being censored by the supposed “Hive Mind” in question. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Also, in unison? Have you even read Thunderdome comments here? They can be quite vicious.

The thing about the situation wasn’t that it was a ‘no’ at all, just her being uncomfortable. We talked and not only did I get the chance to express that the situation was not a problem for me, but we also had a great time after.

I got the ‘yes’ and ‘fuck yes’ after we talked for a few minutes. (I believe I got told “get on your back and take off your pants” or something similar XD)

Al Stefanelli, at one point, said that “Vigilance in personal safety is common sense” to excuse someone who derailed a rape-survivor story with tips on how women could avoid being raped.

I think that’s a disgusting excuse. If “vigilance in personal safety” truly is “common sense”, then it stands to reason that any woman who was raped, or “at risk of rape” was already “maintaining vigilance in personal safety”. If it truly is “common sense”, then it should be assumed that the rape happened because said vigilance was not enough, and that trying to steer the conversation in that direction makes the narrative more about the survivor’s “failure”, and not about the aggressor’s crime.

Oh geez. That idiot. I mean, by now we all know how people who flaunt their “skeptical”, “rational” or “atheist” cred in their own handle* are always complete assholes. Putting “MBA” in a handle? I’m not even sure if we have the equipment to measure the super-mega-assholery there.

* Really, I would extend this to putting any affiliation with any group in one’s handle. You are not your group.

Back on topic, Thunderfoot really seems more and more like he has some seriously bad behavior in his past (or possibly present) that he’s trying to rationalize.

* First of all: Understand that if you go forward with initiating sexual activity not knowing if consent exists, you may or may not be raping someone, but you have proved beyond a shadow of doubt that you are willing to rape someone. Black areas make you a rapist, grey areas make you willing to rape.

* Making absolutely sure that consent is obtained and mutually agreed on. This does not include trying for consent when a person is not in condition to grant consent.

* No doubts as to whether consent was obtained.

* No guesses as to whether consent was obtained.

* No assumptions as to whether consent was obtained.

* No doubt as to whether any partner was capable of giving consent at the time.

Crystal Clear Consent includes Fully Informed Consent. Consent granted under deception is not CCC, it is manufactured consent.

* If you use deception to gain sex–impersonating another person, lying about contraceptive use, failing to disclose STDs–you are denying your partner the right to fully informed consent.

* If you are not sure whether or not you have an STD, disclose this uncertainty. If consent is granted, take responsibility and use protection. Just because you didn’t know for sure is not a defense.

* If you whine and wheedle about using protection a/o contraception, you are not in CCC territory. You are willing to rape.

* Lying about or withholding information that, if known, would’ve resulted in dissent is rape.

* If you consent to X activity under Y conditions and the other party changes those conditions to Z, then you have not consented to what is happening.

Crystal Clear Consent Practices:

* Understanding that consent may be withdrawn, by any involved party, at any time. Initial consent does not mean you get to carry on if consent has been withdrawn. In other words, people are allowed to change their mind at any point.

* If you have not had sex with a given person before, mutually understood language with confirmation is the best way to attain Crystal Clear Consent. Relying on body language or assuming consent without clarification is nearly always insufficient with a new partner. As you get to know your partner(s) better, you will get better at reading nonverbal / nonlingual cues, but clear communication is still absolutely necessary. It is important to remember that rape can still be committed within the confines of a relationship, at any stage. Consent that is not communicated is not CCC.

* If your partner is communicating something, do not assume that it has nothing to do with consent.

* If you initiate or offer and are declined in the context of a specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtations setting, do not initiate or offer again until one of the following four occur:

1. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering and been declined by you.

2. the other party has taken a turn initiating/offering, was accepted by you, but after the activity lapsed you wish to restart.

3. it is an entirely new romantic, sexual, or flirtatious setting.

4. An amount of time has passed that is inverse to the number of times they have accepted your offer before. While it may be acceptable when dating to offer again in a week or in a closer relationship to initiate again after, say, one day [or whatever is the negotiated norm in said relationship] it’s not acceptable to ask someone again if you’ve just met them.

* If you initiate or offer and are declined in a context that is not specifically romantic, sexual, or flirtatious, do not initiate or offer again. Seriously.

* If you’re beginning a new relationship or going for a casual hookup, enthusiasm is key! Your new partner should be enthusiastically and happily involved with you. If no enthusiasm is present, it’s best to go for more communication and put off sex for a while.

* A person who wants consensual sex doesn’t want to commit or experience rape, and a person who rapes does. Whether a given rapist wants their victim(s) drugged, unconscious, frightened, intimidated, trapped, manipulated or tricked, or just pestered until they give in, the rapist wants the end result to be that a rape happens. That includes being forced to penetrate someone else.

@goodbye enemy jaine
But BDSM totally means “no” means “yes” because my girlfriend and I have specifically spelled out the things that we own which the other can use withoutg asking means I can take anything Thunderf00t owns.

As a person who is involved in BDSM and its community, the bullshit about using it to excuse consent is infuriating and just
fuck
i want to stab someone now
namely twaddlefuck

The single biggest issue in the BDSM and kink community is that of consent, what it means, how to negotiate it (especially in consentual-non-consent scenes, I.E. the ones where the sub says “No stop please” but does not mean it), how to respond to safewords, etc.
Hell, some of the biggest objections to Fifty Shades of Grey is that it entirely ignores the consept of consent because being coerced into this against your best wishes is like omg totally sexy you guys

Well yes, and when I taught that women’s self defense seminar that was the first part of it: “two A’s” “awareness and avoidance” in which we reviewed the common sense ideas of being aware of your surroundings and avoiding obvious dangers. My role here was mostly listening…

The rest of the seminar was concerned with the “third A” …action. ie, what to do when you’ve done everything right and someone assaults you anyway (decide if fighting is an option, BE LOUD! how to throw an elbow, a knee, target soft tissue, create enough space to get away…the four “Rs” Remain calm React Retaliate Run…)

Because most women know how to be careful and they also know that being careful isn’t always enough because there are too many men out there who still just don’t get it.

It’s this condescending attitude assuming rape survivors were just careless which denies women’s agency, not the recognition that rape is always the rapist’s fault.

I think Thunderfoot is a buffoon. I’ve thought that for a long time, well before his fall from grace. However, this is not about him. This is about you. You are an intellectual, a University Professor, a man with a position of respect and influence. I want to respect you, I want to hear your rebuttal. You are one of the people that should be taking him apart with intellectual responses that show he’s a fool. Not with grammar school name calling like ‘blunderthud’ etc. All you are doing is engaging in low brow theatrics to pander to your audience. It’s a cheap tactic that you would rightly call out when your opponents use it. Now those same opponents can point to this and scream about ad hominen attacks. It doesn’t gain you anything and just gives other ammunition to use against you. Please stop it. You’re a professor for cripes sake, use your big boy brain and act a little professionally. Quit speaking like you’re a 5 year old making fun of the fat kid in class. All you’re doing is clouding up the real argument. Anyway, that’s it, I’m pretty sure the fan boys will flame me now, but I hope you at least take my meaning.

Is this retaliation because Thunderfoot said that you were publicly convicting Michael Shermer of rape (without benefit of a court) and that you also deleted any comments from your website that were in conflict with your opinion on the matter? I thought you were a better man than that.

Is this retaliation because Thunderfoot said that you were publicly convicting Michael Shermer of rape (without benefit of a court) and that you also deleted any comments from your website that were in conflict with your opinion on the matter? I thought you were a better man than that.

No, it’s criticism, with links to a fuller rebuttal, because Thunderfoot is saying things that are wrong and hateful and, mostly, just plain stupid.
Hope that helps.

If PZ had actually deleted ANY AND ALL comments that disagreed with him about Shermer, there would not be what, like, how many thousands of comments on that post? Anyway, there’s a LOT of them and very few got deleted. You can verify for yourself, almamater, it’s not hard.

I think you should stick with “blunderthud”. It’s hilarious, and while I see the point of the ‘different every time’ approach, it gets a bit distracting and labored. I’ll never be able to think of “him” as anyone but ‘blunderthud’ ever again, regardless. Thanks for that. :-D

All you are doing is engaging in low brow theatrics to pander to your audience.

That’s what you think this is? You seem woefully ignorant of the long history here, including Tfoot’s, in which he indulged in rape apologetics and ethically questionable behaviour, to say the least. A lot of effort went into tearing apart Tfoot’s so-called arguments, and at this point in time, I would say no one is obliged to go through the same old fucking “arguments” again. As it stands, all those refutations are still there, easily found by anyone who wishes to do a bit of searching, and a handy takedown was posted and linked by PZ.

Rather than showing up here to lecture PZ, why aren’t you at Tfoot’s channel, asking why he’s so invested in being a rape apologist?

I think Thunderfoot is a buffoon. I’ve thought that for a long time, well before his fall from grace. However, this is not about him. This is about you.

I think you need to re-evaluate your stance on this. PZ has linked to a multi-part dissection of Thunderfoot’s video, so it is not as though his post is contentless, and yet you seem to be suggesting that chiding PZ for a style of post that you don’t approve of is somehow of greater importance than tackling Thunderfoot’s open and highly toxic rape apologia, that includes plenty of victim blaming and even tries to use BDSM to claim that ‘no means yes’, which could hardly be a much more unambiguous endorsement of rape culture.

Are you sure that this is the position you want to adopt? Don’t you think there are bigger social and ethical issues at stake here than taking shots at PZ’s choice of words?

I so, so SO hate the trope of BDSM being trotted out as an example of non-consent.

There is MORE consent in the lifestyle than pretty much anywhere. Back when I was still active (sigh) I filled out 3 page questionnaires when meeting up with a new Dom to clearly spell out what things I would clearly be interested in, what things were hazy, and what things were an absolute no. Safe words were a must, along with “yellow”… ie things are getting to an uncomfortable place and I may need to use my safe word. And I have never had to use my safe word! A skilled dominant who understands their partner can read them and know how far they can push, even if the sub thinks they can go further. Aftercare is an absolute must. A good D/s partnership is built on trust… which can’t be obtained by anything other than consent.

I’d really like to know: Can Dr. Mason tell me the exact length at which my skirt is still safe?
And my clevage, how much can I show?
Given that I have big boobs and they obviously attract men, can he tell me whether I need a breast reduction before those titties drive men into rape mode?
And about the drink: Is one drink safe? Could Dr. Mason please share his research on how many alcohol units are still safe, or would he simply recommend that I abstain totally?
Really, please, my fluffy pink ladybrains are in dire need of dudly dude scientific explenations.
And, last but not least, is there a metric that allows me to differentiate between bad Saud Arabian mullah rape prevention and good scientific atheist rape prevention? Because my silly pink ladybrains are totally unable to tell the difference…

I ad my voice to those who are glad to discover that somegreybloke has blog.

@bushrat #40: If this was first instance of PZ talking about Tf00t with no historical context, if namecalling was the sole substance of his post and he offered no rebuttal (or links hitherto), you might have a point. Since neither is true, you don’t have a point.

@bushrat #40: I am astonished by this most ridiculous contribution to this conversation. You honestly could not think of something more worthwhile to say on this matter? Tfoot offers some of the worst commentary on the subject of rape and some of the most useless advice to women – not to mention the obvious victim-blaming in which he engages -, and your first thought about PZ’s post is to criticize PZ for not taking Tfoot down? Here is some advice for you: Speak less, read more. You will be doing yourself and the rest of us a huge favor.

BDSM is super strict on consent exactly because it recognizes that there could be a problem. So there’s always a safeword that is pre-negotitated to mean “NO! Stop!” and often another one for “hey, check in”. And often other systems, especially when verbal is stopped to check in and signal “No” or just to make sure the person hasn’t gone unresponsive.

If someone in a dungeon uses the dungeon safe word and their dom tries to continue, that dom is about to be physically restrained, banned, and added to the wall of “fuck no” for all time.

It’s like the exact opposite of the example you want to use if you are a rape apologist fuckwad.

I think what we are seeing is that there was a crew of ignorant disphsits who were having fun pretending to be super smart by taking down the easy targets that are creationists who are now revealing their real colors now they are asking to think beyond “this person claims millions of years happened in 6,000 years, what a dumb fuck”.

Oh, I’ve encountered a LOT of individuals and circles that use BDSM as a means by which to abuse women. I am not convinced teh BDSM communitah is particularly concerned with consent at all. Some of it, sure, but, in general, nah. Lots and lots of dreadful people are involved in it. It’s a mixed bag, like any other.

I’m definitely not claiming all BDSM is non-consensual, just this idea of BDSM being inherently consensual isn’t true either.

That’s a good point to make. BDSM tries more, but there’s a creeping problem these days of just drifting by on the reputation for good consent without actually maintaining the culture that ensures it. And there’s espeically a worrying movement among some doms of arguing that since they have needs to, their subs should push their comfort levels for them which is a million types of squick.

It’s better, but not flawless.

But it’s also definitely not the type of rape factory that douchebags that Tf00t want to pretend it is.

I think most of bushrat’s points @40 have been thoroughly dealt with. I just want to add that I’m really tired of hearing the “and you, a Professor, acting like this!” trope. The implication is that it would be ok for PZ to behave in an allegedly “boorish” manner and use ad hominem arguments if he was just some “lowly” blue collar worker. (Ditto for all the tone trolls who cluck about “swearing like a sailor/Teamster/etc.”)

Also, since I don’t agree with the characterization of PZ’s post, I resent the implication that anyone who is an educated professional is obligated to only speak a certain way and refrain from any expressions of emotion or bluntness.

@Ingdigo Jump – exactly, this does seem very personal to Chunderfoot. I read somegreybloke’s articles yesterday.

@bushrat – “I want to respect you, I want to hear your rebuttal. You are one of the people that should be taking him apart with intellectual responses that show he’s a fool.”

You actually need a rebuttal for this? You can’t say “DON’T RAPE” for yourself?

I bet the “vigilance” crew wouldn’t be so happy if they thought that might lead to, say, rapists getting killed by their victims. Except, of course, the USian ones probably think rapist = scary black guy leaping out of the bushes at white woman, so they wouldn’t have a problem with that.

Chunderbunny posts a clusterbomb of offensive, idiotic farnarkling (not just a one-off either; DunderMifflin has a long and sordid history of being patronisingly smugnorant to the point of enraging anyone with two neurons to rub together) and all you can do, bushrat, is scold PZ? No effort from yourself to discover any context at all? Did you watch Blunderbuss’s video? Read the takedown PZ linked to? Evidently not.

You, sir, are a pompous ass and I thumb my nose in your direction. Vigorously.

#76 kittehserf: “hominom” I like it. Eat the attackers. (I’d probably throw up, but it distills the attitude.)

#72 kittehserf: “You actually need a rebuttal for this? You can’t say “DON’T RAPE” for yourself?” This is important. OK, THIS IS IMPORTANT. Don’t rape. That is essential. Given my upbringing, what my parents taught me, what I believe, what I consider to be universal human rights, what I want for myself, what I will enforce with unimaginable violence for my daughter: Consent is essential.

If it helps those with weak social contract sensibility: attack my daughter, and the police will never find your body. Consider that to be part of the social contract. If that bothers people, even people of good will, tough.

If it helps those with weak social contract sensibility: attack my daughter, and the police will never find your body. Consider that to be part of the social contract. If that bothers people, even people of good will, tough.

Murder is not considered to be part of the social contract by most people. It also paints you as someone who would do everything wrong if faced with someone who had been raped or sexually assaulted. This sort of thing is simply not helpful, in any way. Please refrain from making such comments in the future. If you with to argue the utility of “I’d kill…” expressions, please feel free to take that particular discussion to Thunderdome. Thanks.

Man, Phil Mason really needs men who choose to rape women to be seen as blameless. Like really, really, really needs it. He needs for rapists to be let off the hook like I need coffee in the mornings. Damn.

Whether a given rapist wants their victim(s) drugged, unconscious, frightened, intimidated, trapped, manipulated or tricked, or just pestered until they give in, the rapist wants the end result to be that a rape happens. That includes being forced to penetrate someone else.

What gives me the creeps is that there are probably argumentative people out there who might try to make the claim that “maniputated” and “tricked” and “pestered” (and maybe even “intimidated”) are in that amorphous “gray area”. Yuck!

You’re all twisting the things he said. One would guess that people with high education at least be able to understand what Thunderfoot says. Rather than slandering him like this.

I could understand him just fine and understood every analogy he had. I too think this whole “Teach men not to rape” isn’t going to be successful. The people who rape got something in their head and telling them not to do is just going to make them do it. They want to feel powerful.

Go watch the video again and put away your hate when you watch it. If you haven’t watched you should because you have no idea what you’re arguing against..
Each time I watch one of his nicely educated videos I see some sites freak out about what he has said and completely bend everything he has said for the worse.

You people ain’t a nice group of people as far as I can tell. Because you do the same thing. Sad really. You guys should feel a little bit of ashamed because of this.

You people ain’t a nice group of people as far as I can tell. Because you do the same thing. Sad really. You guys should feel a little bit of ashamed because of this.

You might wish to consider that there is a considerable history here, and there’s absolutely no need to be nice to someone who has proven themselves to be a misogynist, and actively promotes misogynistic thought, attitudes and actions. Try watching the videos linked in the original post.

You’re all twisting the things he said. One would guess that people with high education at least be able to understand what Thunderfoot says. Rather than slandering him like this.

We know exactly what thunderfootinmouth is saying, and that he is full of shit for saying it. If you have any third party evidence to back his claims, present them, or your opinion, like his opinion, will dismissed without evidence.

I’m beginning to think that PZ and Tf00t are talking about two completely different types of rape, and that there is a disconnect in trying to apply the admonitions against one type to the other type. What I mean is that there is forcible, obviously non-consensual rape and there is “date rape,” which has so many gray areas that consent can be unclear or misunderstood by one or the other party. The more I read about date rape, the more I think that Thunderf00t’s advice can’t be adequately applied to it, whereas it can absolutely be applied to the former (forcible rape), which is more a crime of violence and power.

I am a survivor of forcible stranger rape, which puts my default mindset in the camp of risk/hazard assessment on a practical level, rather than on a negotiating level, as I understand the instances of date rape are often played out. I admit I know very little about handling questionable sexual encounters between acquaintances and am biased towards the zero sum mindset of the violent aspect of rape.

The more I read, the more I realize these two types must be handled differently. One cannot treat a friend as if he was a potential threat at all times, and there is a different skill set to navigating the advances of such a person than there would be in the case of handling the stranger who just came through the window and put the knife to your throat. I do think there can be crossover, which is where risk assessment would come in, but it is obvious this is a complex issue and my own experience cannot bridge such a gap.

The short of it is that I think the societal approach can do good when it comes to preventing date rape and clarifying what constitutes consent but it is not as effective against the opportunistic stranger rape, which is much more a matter of assessing absolute risk and employing the risk avoidance techniques that I think Tf00t was referring to. I’ll take a look at somegreybloke’s breakdown as soon as I can, but I suspect a large part of the problem is, in the words of Strother Martin, “a failure to communicate.”

Caine, Fleur du mal: I doubt it’s as successful as those people think it is. If telling people not to rape works it’s because they wouldn’t do it in the first place. How well do you think telling criminals to stop doing crime when they are put in jail works? It doesn’t, they just have a different mind on the matter.

As for his history, yea ok, I didn’t think it was the same group but this explains stuff. You people are just plain assholes to put it nicely. None of the videos of Thunderfoot that I’ve watched have showed him being misogynist or actively promotes it. It’s you people twisting the words he say to your liking.

You all act superior and follow the bandwagon of hate when someone posts a complete bullshit post about one of his videos.

If this site is also known for that Atheist+ part then that’s even worse. I’m an atheist myself but that Atheist+ just doesn’t sound good at all.

Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls: When it’s you guys who first bent the words he says to your liking it’s more of that you are the ones who need to re check your sources. Watch the video again to the very end.

But in short all Thunderfoot was talking about was how to reduce the chance of being raped by changing your body language. But even if you lowered your chances to a minimal you could still be raped.

So yeah, maybe — just maybe (sarcastic) — we’re not very effective at communicating what “rape” is. If you don’t use the R-word, people are quite open about how they’ve violated consent. Educational note: no consent = rape.

In short: we don’t actually tell people not to rape. We tell people not to hide in bushes in order to sexually assault random people. Pro-tip: that isn’t the vast majority of committed rapes.

Could someone explain to me why what Thunderf00t said is in any way wrong?
As he said in the video, saying “Don’t tell us what to wear, tell them not to rape” is just like saying “Don’t tell us to lock our doors, tell bulglars not to break in”.

It’s ridicilous, he never said it was your fault for being raped, or that you deserve it, neither did he say the way you dress justifies rape.
He simply said that if you dress differently it’ll lower your chances of being raped.
Now, weither that is true or not – is unknown to me, however the statement itself is logical and makes sense.

He also pointed out in his video that trying to ‘teach men not to rape’ is similar to trying to teach gays not to be gay – it’s their sexual urges.

The key to reducing rape is educating people about why harming others OVERALL is wrong rather than tell potential rapists “DON’T RAPE! RAPE IS EVIL! OBEY!” .

Could someone explain to me why what Thunderf00t said is in any way wrong?

Simple Lily, TF is operating under the fallacious presupposition that rape is about sex. It isn’t. It’s about dominance and power. If the suggestions he made works, show us with evidence from here that they do.

I admit I know very little about handling questionable sexual encounters between acquaintances and am biased towards the zero sum mindset of the violent aspect of rape.

I am a survivor of date acquaintance rape, and I assure you that just because it was not physically violent, it was a horribly violent assault on my personhood.

I suggest you spend some time educating yourself, and I strongly suggest that you remove the phrase “questionable sexual encounter” from your mindset. I did not have a questionable sexual encounter. I had a person spend several weeks and a few dates gaining my trust enough to get me alone so that he could rape me.
There was absolutely nothing “questionable” about it.

Here is a link to start your education. Please read it in full before you spout more hurtful, victim blaming opinions on this thread.

My telepathic powers suggest to me that most of the people making rape/burglary analogies have experienced neither.
It’s all theoretical. A crime is a crime is a crime.

There is only one experience in my life that I could liken in any way to the emotional and psychological impact of rape: when my house was burned down. It was in a small, 99% white town where the county sheriff was the fire chief and also had some position with the town–the details of which escape me now–that gave him oversight on demolitions. He worked it in such a way that, gosh, people couldn’t get their burned out houses knocked down without just signing them over to him.

And the sheriff/fire chief hated my entire family.

So when my house caught fire while my sister and her kids were staying with me, the fire department showed up and opened up every door on the bottom story and then sat back and waited. Why, it turned out the hydrant on our street didn’t work! So all they could do was sit around and do their best to ensure the fire had enough oxygen. A water truck from the next town over arrived eventually and they got the fire under control after about three hours. We left to buy clothing with the emergency money from Red Cross, as everyone was in their pajamas. When we came back, the house was a shell. It seems that after we left, the fire chief went through the house to check things over and then a neighbor called him out to talk to him. As they were speaking, my bedroom upstairs burst into flames. And well, shucks, the water truck was gone again.

I lost everything I own. Three cats died. It was a long, agonizing process of standing outside shivering in my pajamas, exposed to the world, sobbing as I watched my life go up in flames and the people who should have been helping stood around and did nothing.

That? That is the only experience I’ve ever had that came close to what rape did to me.

Oh, except there’s one thing: When the insurance company checked over the house, they determined the fire was not my fault. That’s the official word on it. Nobody from the insurance company told me I should have had more smoke alarms. They never asked me if I smoked or kept incense burning. They didn’t accuse me of being lax with electrical upkeep or any of that. No, they officially declared that my house burning down wasn’t my fault. And so with that lack of victim blaming it’s in fact not like when I was raped at all.

My mind just kinda boggled at the thought of chastity-belt (for either gender) decoration-comparison. It tickled my sense of the somewhat absurd, is all.

It does tickle the silly side, to be sure. From what I recall, these weren’t initially designed and produced for kink, but for people who couldn’t manage to keep their pants zipped. They were quickly discovered by the kink community though, and are widely considered fetish wear now.

Imagine a world where burglary was treated like rape is in our world. Imagine a world where victims of burglaries are accused of being careless or just accusing people of burglary to get attention. Where burglary victims are doubted and outright shamed for coming forward. Where only a fraction of burglars were brought to court, and even fewer ever even given a slap on the wrist for their crime. Where people pat each other on the back for their shiny objects and think that burglarized, like, totally count, dude. Where there are politicians making a distinction between “burglary” and legitimate burglary. Where inviting a person into your house is a sign that you are allowing them to enter your house on all other occasions. Where giving people gifts is a sign that people are forever to be forgiven if they get the wrong impression and just outright steal things from you. Where the main focus of combating the burglary epidemic is not by opposing the actual burglars and ensuring that they are discovered and punished, but by encouraging victims and potential victims to stop having such appealing property.

So, yeah…

Burglary/rape analogies: Because “Just World Bias” is a hell of a set of blinders.

Thanks, SallyStrange. That night still gives me panic attacks and flashbacks on occasion.

If that story was a Shitty Rape Analogy, it’d probably focus on the fire and the loss of property. Yet the fire was just a fire. Just a natural event that happened. The traumatic part is the agency on the part of the fire chief and the choices that were made over and over again to ensure that my house was going to be destroyed. I could put a smoke alarm in every single room, but if the people who had all the power wanted my house to burn? There wasn’t a damn thing I could do about it.

MM, you have all my empathy as well. That’s one of my greatest and most enduring fears. And what you say is the worst of it – all the alarms in the world won’t do jack shit if you don’t get the help you need.

I suggest you spend some time educating yourself, and I strongly suggest that you remove the phrase “questionable sexual encounter” from your mindset. I did not have a questionable sexual encounter. I had a person spend several weeks and a few dates gaining my trust enough to get me alone so that he could rape me.
There was absolutely nothing “questionable” about it.

My apologies to Tethys for a comment that must have come off as sounding like victim blaming, when that was not my intention. It does look rather indelicate, and my intention was rather to point at the question of how both parties might view an encounter that one thinks is consensual and the other does not and how it can be sorted out in a court of law. Someone inevitably has to sort out the evidence. That was my only intention in making that statement. I do not think acquaintance (or date) rape is somehow “questionable” in and of itself. It is just hard to prove. I did read the article you linked, and the difficulty of proving guilt in such instances is addressed in it. Good evidence-gathering is essential and the process should never be allowed to devolve into “he said, she said.” I agree with that.

This article also noted the study of unapprehended rapists outlining their strategies for victimizing women in social situations, which suggests that there are fewer simply clueless men who don’t know about consent and more intentional victimizers among men. If this is indeed the case generally, then the advice to identify red flags in behavior and engage in safe behavior at social events is even more necessary that I had previously realized. In fact, women’s self-defense classes should include psychological warfare training in order to identify situations in which we might be victimized. This also suggests that the “Teach them not to rape” program would reach a smaller group of men than previously thought–those who are genuinely unaware about consent issues. This smaller group of men is the only subset that would actually be helped by such programs. I do think that training bystanders and other concerned parties to watch for signs of victimizing behavior is a good idea, and perhaps this might be more effective than a “teach them not to rape” campaign. It would bring an under-appreciated aspect of potential criminal behavior into the consciousness of the mainstream.

In an ideal world, we would not need such advice, but we do not live in an ideal world. You know this firsthand, and so do I. I would never blame a victim for what happened to him or her, and if I caused hurt I apologize. I do, however, agree with C0nc0rdance in his latest youtube video, when he says that repeating good advice is not a bad idea. Mindfulness is never a bad thing.